Abdul Qadoos vs The State and another
This matter concerns a petition for post-arrest bail filed by the accused, Abdul Qadoos, in relation to FIR No. 1165/15 under Section 496-A of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the petitioner was entitled to bail after arrest given the circumstances of the case. The Court observed that there was an unexplained ten-day delay in the registration of the FIR, and the petitioner's name was not originally included but was added later via a supplementary statement. Furthermore, the Court noted that the petitioner had been in custody since December 2015, the investigation was complete, no recoveries were made from him, and he was a first-time offender. The Court held that the offence charged did not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the Court granted bail, establishing the principle that in non-prohibitory offences, the grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, and that the case warranted further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898.
- Does an offence under Section 496-A of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Is the grant of bail the rule and refusal the exception in cases involving offences that do not fall within the prohibitory clause of Section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can a case be considered one of further inquiry under Section 497(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the investigation is complete and the accused is a first-time offender?
- Section 497, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 496-A, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 497(2), Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
Through this petition under Section 497 Cr.P.C. Abdul Qadoos, the petitioner has sought bail after arrest in case FIR No.1165/15 dated 19.1 1.2015 under Sections 496-A PPC, Police Station Airport, District Rawalpindi.
2. The arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record of this case has also been perused with their able assistance. This is bail after arrest and deeper appreci ation is not allowed at this stage. It has been noticed by this Court that there is a delay of ten days in the registration of FIR which has not been explained by the complainant. The name of the petitioner does not figure in the FIR rather his name has been replaced with Imran Asif alias Yasir Shah through supplementary statement. The allegation against the petitioner in the FIR is that on 09.11.2015 he alongwith his co-accused abducted the wife of the complainant Usman Farooq Kayani for illicit intercourse. During the investigation of this case the petitioner has undergone extensive period of remand but nothing has been recovered from him. Admittedly the petitioner is previously non-convict, he is behind the bars since 10.12.2015, investigation qua the petitioner is complete and he is no more required for the purpose of further investiga tion, challan has been submitted, therefore, no useful purpose would be served by keeping him under incarceration for an indefinite period. The offence under section 496-A PPC with which the petitioner is charged does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. and in such like cases grant of bail is a rule and its refusal is an exception. Reliance in this regard is placed on the case of Tariq Bashir and 5 others v . The State ( PLD 1995 SC 34 ).
3. For what has been discussed above, the case of the petitioner becomes one of further inquiry covered by sub- section (2) of section 497 Cr.P.C. This petitio n is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail after arrest subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court.
4. The observations made above are tentative in nature and are strictly confined to the decision of this bail petition only.